If the sox are smart, they leave dan bard in the pen as a set up man. Bobby jenks cannot be counted at this point given the fact that he recently had another surgery and may not be ready for spring traing. If we move bard to the rotation, we will create more problems then we will solve. Here are some reasons why bard should not be conveted to a starter: 1) Bard failed as a starter in the minors 2) The most innings he has pitched in the majors in one season is 74. If he is going to be a reliable starter he will have to pitch 2.5 x that. And given that he was tiring at the end of last season, chances are he will not fare well logging extra innings. 3) We would lose our top set up man and risk gaining nothing. With bobby jenks out, do we really want to take bard out too leaving us with melancon as our only set up man? I think melancon is a good player, but he cannot be relied upon as our only set up man. And please dont mention aceves as a set up man. He is a long reliever/6-7th inning guy. Thats it. 4) What happens if bard fails as a starter? Then we could have a joba chamberlain situation on our hands. The yankees made a huge mistake taking him out of the pen where he was dominant and converting him into a starter. And chamberlain, unlike bard, was actually a good starter in the minors. 5) Our rotation is not reliable enough to take that kind of risk. Our number 3 starter clay buchholz has never pitched 200 innings in a season and he is 27 yrs old. He has been injured multiple times. We all saw what happened last year with rotation. We need 3 guys we can count on. We have 2 in lester and beckett. The guy we need for the 3rd spot without a doubt is matt garza. Then we our 3 plus buchholz slots in to the number 4 spot. Bard stays in the pen giving a much better back of the bullpen with bailey and melancon already there. The 5th spot in the rotation can be either go to someone like doubront who should be given a shot to win it or they could sign someone like rich harden. Also, aceves could be a candidate for that spot as well but i would keep him in the pen.

If the sox are smart, they leave dan bard in the pen as a set up man. Bobby jenks cannot be counted at this point given the fact that he recently had another surgery and may not be ready for spring traing. If we move bard to the rotation, we will create more problems then we will solve. Here are some reasons why bard should not be conveted to a starter: 1) Bard failed as a starter in the minors 2) The most innings he has pitched in the majors in one season is 74. If he is going to be a reliable starter he will have to pitch 2.5 x that. And given that he was tiring at the end of last season, chances are he will not fare well logging extra innings. 3) We would lose our top set up man and risk gaining nothing. With bobby jenks out, do we really want to take bard out too leaving us with melancon as our only set up man? I think melancon is a good player, but he cannot be relied upon as our only set up man. And please dont mention aceves as a set up man. He is a long reliever/6-7th inning guy. Thats it. 4) What happens if bard fails as a starter? Then we could have a joba chamberlain situation on our hands. The yankees made a huge mistake taking him out of the pen where he was dominant and converting him into a starter. And chamberlain, unlike bard, was actually a good starter in the minors. 5) Our rotation is not reliable enough to take that kind of risk. Our number 3 starter clay buchholz has never pitched 200 innings in a season and he is 27 yrs old. He has been injured multiple times. We all saw what happened last year with rotation. We need 3 guys we can count on. We have 2 in lester and beckett. The guy we need for the 3rd spot without a doubt is matt garza. Then we our 3 plus buchholz slots in to the number 4 spot. Bard stays in the pen giving a much better back of the bullpen with bailey and melancon already there. The 5th spot in the rotation can be either go to someone like doubront who should be given a shot to win it or they could sign someone like rich harden. Also, aceves could be a candidate for that spot as well but i would keep him in the pen. Posted by redsoxpride34

I'd like to see Bard and Aceves stay in the pen, but if one had to go, I'd choose Aceves not Bard. Oh well.

If the sox are smart, they leave dan bard in the pen as a set up man. Bobby jenks cannot be counted at this point given the fact that he recently had another surgery and may not be ready for spring traing. If we move bard to the rotation, we will create more problems then we will solve. Here are some reasons why bard should not be conveted to a starter: 1) Bard failed as a starter in the minors 2) The most innings he has pitched in the majors in one season is 74. If he is going to be a reliable starter he will have to pitch 2.5 x that. And given that he was tiring at the end of last season, chances are he will not fare well logging extra innings. 3) We would lose our top set up man and risk gaining nothing. With bobby jenks out, do we really want to take bard out too leaving us with melancon as our only set up man? I think melancon is a good player, but he cannot be relied upon as our only set up man. And please dont mention aceves as a set up man. He is a long reliever/6-7th inning guy. Thats it. 4) What happens if bard fails as a starter? Then we could have a joba chamberlain situation on our hands. The yankees made a huge mistake taking him out of the pen where he was dominant and converting him into a starter. And chamberlain, unlike bard, was actually a good starter in the minors. 5) Our rotation is not reliable enough to take that kind of risk. Our number 3 starter clay buchholz has never pitched 200 innings in a season and he is 27 yrs old. He has been injured multiple times. We all saw what happened last year with rotation. We need 3 guys we can count on. We have 2 in lester and beckett. The guy we need for the 3rd spot without a doubt is matt garza. Then we our 3 plus buchholz slots in to the number 4 spot. Bard stays in the pen giving a much better back of the bullpen with bailey and melancon already there. The 5th spot in the rotation can be either go to someone like doubront who should be given a shot to win it or they could sign someone like rich harden. Also, aceves could be a candidate for that spot as well but i would keep him in the pen. Posted by redsoxpride34

Have to disagree. If choosing between Aceves or Bard for rotation I'll take Bard. Of the 2 he's the one that could become a top of the rotation starter, he's got the stuff to do it [hitters hit 220 of his fastball / 180 slider] People want to point to his first 3 mos in minors where he was terrible as starter, if this were true Pedey would never have made it as 2nd baseman. I think he was trying to live up to hype of top draft pick. He knows he can get big league hitters out now. One thing that stands out about Bards numbers are how bad he was w/ game on line [win% / Save %] as starter pressure not the same. As for 8th inning, thats Melancons. While Bard has been a terrific set up man for RS. Closer look tells he was not great in 8th last year, was in 6 or 7th w/ runners aboard, but looking at numbers can see why RS were not going to let him become the closer.player era whip BB/9 K/9 GB/FB Save% Win%D.Bard 3.33 .959 3.0 9.1 1.12 17[25 career] .182 [28C]M.Melancon 2.78 1.224 3.1 8 1.39 80[78 career] .667[67C]

While Bard more likely to get a K, Melancon more likely to get DP grounder. With game on line have to like Melancon's numbers much better wins 2/3 of games he's in vs only about 1/4 for Bard. Bard save % is pitiful 17% last year and 25% for career. While Melancon is 80% for last year and career. As for Joba comparision its fair, because it did not work, but also remember when he went to rotation his velocity was 2-3 mph less on fastball, was elbow a problem?

If the Red Sox obtained a true young superstar RH slugger, they are strong contenders, immediately.

And what does it say about a former GM, that a near 200 million a year payroll needs "one more quality starting pitcher" just to be a contender!!!!!!!!!! GTF out of the kitchen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Posted by hankwilliamsjr

#1 - Yes, any team who acquired a young superstar slugger would immediately improve ... NSDT. Of course, why didn't the FO think of that? Yes, a young superstar slugger is a good thing ... I can't believe all these baseball execs don't realize that.

#2 - It says that the former GM hired two guys who later needed TJ surgery.

The rest of your post was the same old mindless drivel. Back to ignore for you.

"It's the first time we got 280+ IP from those two, and the first time we got sub 3.50 ERAs from the two."

Moon - FWIW, in 2009 Beckett and Lester combined for 415 IP at an ERA of about 3.6. Lester has started at least 30 games each season and Beckett has averaged 181 IP over the last 8 seasons (28.5 GS). I don't think it's that optimistic to project ~85GS for our top 3.

I understand your overall point and don't think it's out in left field, but I do think your take is somewhat pessimistic.

"It's the first time we got 280+ IP from those two, and the first time we got sub 3.50 ERAs from the two."

Moon - FWIW, in 2009 Beckett and Lester combined for 415 IP at an ERA of about 3.6. Lester has started at least 30 games each season and Beckett hasaveraged 181 IP over the last 8 seasons (28.5 GS). I don't think it's that optimistic to project ~85GS for our top 3.

I meant to say 380+ IP (190+190 like 2011) and sub 3.50 ERAs in the same season... my bad. You are right; they did pitch 415 IP in 2009, and Beckett's 3.86 ERA wasn't bad.

I understand your overall point and don't think it's out in left field, but I do think your take is somewhat pessimistic.

I'm usually accused of being too optimistic. I certainly think the big 3 can all have full & great seasons in 2012, but to count on it is being overly optimistic, in my opinion.

IP '11 '10 '09 '08 '07 '06

Beck 193-128-212-174-201-205

Lest 192-208-203-210- 63- 81

Buch 83-174- 92- 76- 23- n/a

ERA

Beck 2.89 5.78 3.86 4.03 3.27 5.01

Lest 3.47 3.25 3.41 3.21 4.57 4.76

Buch 3.48 2.33 4.21 6.75 1.59 n/a

All teams assume their top starters will be healthy, but it was interesting to see the Cards pull it off without Wainwright. It is possible, but you better have a deep staff or be willing to pick up a key guy at the deadline.

I look back at last spring and remember almost everyone saying we had a deep starter staff. I agreed at the time, and it's hard for any team to plan on 2 rotation guys going down (Dice-K & Buch), another pitching hurt probably all year (Lackey), and 2 other guys missing a few key games in September (Beck & Bedard). Then there was their 8/9 guy hurt and not able to start even one game and Tazawa injured from the season before. Here was our depth chart to the best of my recollection:

1) Lester/Beckett

2) Beckett/Lester

3) Buchholtz

4) Dice-K

5) Lackey

6) Wakefield

7) (Aceves from pen)

8) Doubront

9) Miller

10) Tazawa

12) Weiland

(Picked up Bedard at the deadline)

2012: (assuming Bard and Aceves both start, which I am skeptical about)

Injuries are part of game, and teams never know who will go down. One of my biggest complaints w/ RS is amount of injuries[past few years] and think part of problem is w/ medical & training staffs. Thats why I was very happy to see some changes made[good luck-Mike Boyle!]. But last year 80% of our starting rotation missed time[40% a good portion of season] and the other 20% [Lackey] may have been pitching thru an elbow problem. To be in first place as long as we were goes a long way in saying how good the offense was. But the one thing that was obvious was these injuries had a cause and effect to the bullpen, the bullpen was overworked and was terrible the last mos. of the season, just worn out! I would prefer to lose 1 guy like Cards did and have the other 4 stay healthy rest of season, than lose 4 guys for different lengths over the course of the season. IMO if RS had lost 1 guy for entire season and other 4 stayed healthy RS would have won AL East and made playoffs. Foul balls that breaks bones or knee to ribs nothing you can do about part of the game, its the muscle pulls, strains, hammy's, and such that having a good training staff should help prevent. Lets face how many teams can actually say during the course of a season they had players get heavier, shouldn't they lose weight during the course of 162 game season? Maybe me but looked like some RS players [pitching staff] looked like they gained as season progressed?

In Response to Re: Choices with the Sox Pitching Staff : Even if we dumped Jenks or traded Scutty, I wouldn't signe these two at those prices. I'd offer Oswalt maybe $4M with incentives up to $6M, and Kuroda slightly more.Posted by moonslav59

Oswalt scares me somewhat because of his back troubles last year, but what's wrong with Kuroda? Yes, he's 37 years old, which would be a problem if we were offering a multi-year deal, but we're talking about a 1 year deal for a guy who threw 202 innings last year with a 3.07 ERA and 1.21 WHIP.

He's thrown 398 1/3 innings over the past 2 years with his best 2 seasons by ERA (WHIP's of 1.16 and 1.21 rank 2nd and 3rd best for his career).

If he was showing signs of decline, I'd agree that age is a problem, but he hasn't shown any signs of slowing down. There's minimal age risk here on a 1 year deal.

Oswalt scares me somewhat because of his back troubles last year, but what's wrong with Kuroda? Yes, he's 37 years old, which would be a problem if we were offering a multi-year deal, but we're talking about a 1 year deal for a guy who threw 202 innings last year with a 3.07 ERA and 1.21 WHIP.

He pitched a lot of innings in spacious LA and SD. The NL West is also a weak hitting division.

He's thrown 398 1/3 innings over the past 2 years with his best 2 seasons by ERA (WHIP's of 1.16 and 1.21 rank 2nd and 3rd best for his career).

Too many innings for a man that age.

If he was showing signs of decline, I'd agree that age is a problem, but he hasn't shown any signs of slowing down. There's minimal age risk here on a 1 year deal.

Yes, he's 37 years old, which would be a problem if we were offering a multi-year deal, but we're talking about a 1 year deal for a guy who threw 202 innings last year with Contract year for an old guy with high mileage from a year ago. Offer 1 to 2 million plus incentives and let him become some other team's old man problem.Posted by hankwilliamsjr

He didn't have any problem bouncing back from "high mileage" last season after signing a 1 year, $12M deal.

In Response to Re: Choices with the Sox Pitching Staff : seriously who cares about his age besides mr waste of time as U said it's a 1 yr deal and he's coming off a 200 inn yr with a strong 2nd 1/2Posted by pinstripezac

Thanks Zac. His age is the reason it's a 1 year deal, otherwise he could likely be asking for Lackey / Burnett type of money.

Last year Kuroda had a significantly better K/BB rate and the same WHIP as Lincecum, but because he's no 37 people don't want to give him $10M on a 1 year deal (assuming we can create room in the budget)?